Yes, it limits it.
But there are VPNs, multiple IPs/computers etc to circumvent that.
And going Omega costs, whereas remaining Alpha costs nothing.
I dont think EVE should appeal to everyone, never have.
Cmon, you have read me for years. You know I dont think that.
I, do, however, think every lost sub is bad. How could it not be.
On the issue of Alphas, I think all Alphas should be incentivized to go Omega.
I dont think “permanent” Alphas are good for the game, or CCPs bottomline.
Yes, Alphas provide content, but as before Alphas, players should always be encouraged/incentivized to sub.
Before it was a 15-30day trial, depending how you set it up, and then you had to sub, or drop out.
Now, with permanent Alphas, the paradigm has changed.
TLDR: The more Alphas can accomplish, the less incentive there is to sub, ever.
There is a real danger we end up with a mass of Alpha accounts that have no incentive to sub, or buy PLEX from CCP, if they can earn enough isk ingame to buy what they want/need.
That applies to both vets and noobs.
They dont need to expend isk on PLEX for a sub, inorder to stay Alpha.
They can instead just use isk to buy daily/injectors, no matter how long it takes them.
Do you see what I mean?
They have no integral costs. They can buy 20PLEX off the market for a daily injector with isk inorder to inch towards the 20mil limit, at their own pace, without ever paying CCP a dime.
This toon has around 20mil SP. I paid CCP to get that.
These new Alphas wont have to pay a cent to get 20mil SP.
Hmm… to low you say? As things are you are quite save to haul one billion ISK around in a freighter. Things can get risky when you carry 2 billion around. No cargo expanders and a weber should do the trick. For save delivery of cargo worth three or four billion ISK some scouting and teamwork is required. Ever thought of an escort?
My question is: How much do you think those numbers should go up? Save solo hauling of freighters worth 10 bil. ISK? More? Less? But keep in mind: Competition will get harder when you can haul anything solo and unscounted. Why would I even need a courier ever?
2 Likes
I dont think there is any reason to increase costs of Omega gankers.
As Omegas, they have already paid back into the system.
They have full access to all of EVE, including effective ganking.
What concerns me, is Alphas.
Eve jail for 24 hours lol would love to see the tears.
1 Like
Ultima Online used to have a jail lol.
Admins would literally dump you in an in-game cell till your infraction expired.
1 Like
Sin-bin, huh? I don’t think CCP could possibly do it. Anyway, they dumped the Community Team, so it won’t happen unless they find some way to automate it. Which could lead to problems.
Only yesterday, a mate of mine managed to get yet another carebear to CONCORD himself in trying to extricate his barge from a bumping spree. When you’ve still got folks whose understanding of mechanics is so woeful, introducing a feature which would put all miscreants in the cooler, would probably have the miners asking to be made exceptions, for their ‘genuine mistake’.
But, you were jesting, I know…
3 Likes
It was funny/ingenious as hell.
Very immersive 
2 Likes
It doesn’t cost ganking alts. After a few months training I can maintain a stable of Omega ganking alts indefinitely at no additional costs using skill trading to earn my PLEX. I get that Alphas lower the bar for the less creative types to get into the activity, but generally they are happy with their mindless grinding so I don’t think many of them will take the plunge in EULA-breaking territory with VPNs or whatever to start multi-box alpha gankers. CCP really should though keep a close eye on this though, and this is my biggest concern of the upcoming Alphas changes: increase abuse by Omega players to run free alts.
I can’t and won’t swear it has never happened, but I have never seen or even heard of a ganker multi-boxing Alphas with VPNs or even the simple bypass of the multi-login restriction everyone knows about (was that fixed in the latest launcher update?). I have however, run across miners that are almost certainly multi-boxing Alpha miners, and have had multiple people tell me that it is something commonly done by their corpmates, some of them using ex-Omegas that never dock to even mine for free in Barges or Exhumers.
Alpha abuse is a real problem in my estimation, one that will grow, and I am afraid that CCP doesn’t have the resources to police it effectively.
But to get this back on some semblance of the topic, while I will agree that skill trading actually reduced the cost of ganking by providing free accounts (as it did for mining, PI, industry, and anything that benefits from multiple, lower-skilled alts) Alpha clones did nothing of the sort and are near useless to us ganking afficiandos as scouts, bumpers, looters, or supplemental DPS characters.
4 Likes
Wrong. CODE’s critera for choosing a target. Can we gank it? If yes, gank it. If we can’t gank it, don’t gank it.
1 Like
I may have missed it but has there been a cost break down of anything yet?
2 Likes
Hi Rod
I don’t think I have IGNORED your basic premise, and I am only able to respond with logic.
This both my curse and my blessing, I do not ask for you to understand this, I merely state it as fact.
For the others you quoted, while I know they can speak for themselves, I have not seen them
ignore your basic premise, fail to understand the topic, and I have not seen them react without reading or thinking.
Indeed @Teckos_Pech and @Ima_Wreckyou have a post history, as do I, as do you,
the content of this history rather give the lie to your weak insult, if that is what it was
(rather than the noise a cow makes when it chews its cud):
So to directly respond to the OP with a logic so pure it neither needs or invokes any rhetoric beyond that always implicit in any attempt to engage with
@Fabulous_Rod
It will be lengthy, as I will give FULL JUSTICE to the OP, for how could justice claim that name and be anything less than full? Full perhaps as a bag of hot air or a bag of golden coins, but brimming with logic you may be sure.
Attend:
-
Your OP makes assumptions, and assertions.
-
It relies on these assumptions for the logic of its argument to work- indeed rather than take the logical form of a syllogism or more complex logical form, still based on premises and the use of logical connectors such as if/then/and.or. It rather takes the form of one assertion or assumption after another, followed by ‘it therefore follows’.
-
One of these assumptions is that 'the cost of suicide ganking is ‘too low’.
3.a. By ‘too low’ and from the further context of the OP, we must understand ‘too low’ to mean ‘not high enough’
in your OP for instance you say as fact ‘they are always flying disposable ships’ (not yet realising that all ships are disposable in eve, especially and always the mighty Titans, as they are war ships flown by immortal space gods who cannot themselves die).
3.b. This assumption, that the cost is too low, that is the keystone of the OP, is in a way also its conclusion- it is justification for needing a ‘Ward of gank expense’ and also in a sense the conclusion of your ‘list of assertions’ which all seek to state that ‘the cost of suicide ganking is too low’, so we can see your logic. if logic it is, has the strange form of a circle that never completes and rather turns upon itself for eternity, a lemniscate logic if you will.
-
Another assumption is that suicide gankers take ‘zero risk for the potential of tremendous rewards’.
-
You also make the assumption that suicide ganking has decreased the potential for more interactive PVP in low or null, you present this as a cause/effect relation ship, but you have not even established a correlation, such that by logic I could say ‘correlation does not equal cause’-
you have not even taken this first step to identify whether these two things SG in high sec, and Low Sec/Null Sec PVP are related in any way, or indeed whether ‘the potential for more interactive PVP in low or null has decreased’, or how and why the two are connected. -
You then declare you cannot 'follow them around in high sec ‘or be banned for harassment’. Again this is another assertion, to be banned for harassment they would have to petition you, and a GM would need to establish your intent, if they were a suicide ganker, and your intent was to blow them up, you would not be banned for harassment.
A character, for instance, could follow @Fabulous_Rod around high sec, shooting him with fireworks, and posting links to all his eveo posts in local, with commentary like, look at this guy, looks like a good gank target to me, this would not be harassment, but in game consequences for behaviour on the game forums- we harass other players, characters are generally fair game.
6.a. I wonder if this tension present in 6, between a model of harassment based on harassing an actual person, and attrition through the legal mechanics of a pvp sandbox, lies at the heart of your confusion?
IS THIS THE KEY THAT CAN UNLOCK THE LOGIC OF FABULOUS ROD, the missing premise that would turn his list of assertions into an argument, that all none-consensual pvp is griefing? I make no assertion, I merely suggest it as a possibility.
Nevertheless, this clause was also an assertion and an assumption- you have not taken to steps to establish it as valid inference.
- You also make assumptions as to the motive of individuals who engage in this activity- this is a constantin ‘your work’ but I would highlight one instance of this:
7.a) I would counter it costs them the effort of finding and targeting you if you are a specific target, or of waiting on a pipe if they merely wish to take any shuttle, much costlier than the shuttle pilots option of not auto-piloting if they do not want to lose their ship. This seems like quite balanced risk and reward.
7.b) However, because this clause is assertion and not argument I need offer no counter. I can just say, establish this as fact, then I can accept it as premise in an argument, otherwise any cow can chew their cud.
8… Having assumed all of these things to be the case your argument takes this form
IF all these assumptions are true
AND IF these assumed consequences are also true
THEN there may be a need for
So given all of you assupmtions have been addressed by those you claim ignore your OP
and challenged successfully I would say, your attempt to denigrate their characters personal qualities, rather than the substance of their replies may indicate you know you are full of ■■■■.
On the other hand, you may not have understood their replies or the others in this thread.
I will therefore repeat your argument and counter it as I have done previously
IF all these assumptions are true
AND IF these assumed consequences are also true
THEN there may be a need for
To which I say
The assumptions are unfounded and untrue, evidence in thread
Your assumed consequences, are also unfounded, evidence in thread
THEREFORE
NO NEED FOR ‘WARD OF INCREASED COST TO SUICIDE GANK’
Is my logic clear, or am I merely being obnoxious?
Have I attended to the OP, clause by clause, line by line, as if it were actually an argument?
What do you have to say to my response? Can you provide an actual argument, of the quality that such a ridiculously game breaking device SHOULD require for its justification, or
are we merely chewing the CUD.
YOUR CALL DUDE
PS. Why temp banned darkfall again?
PPS.
EDIT-
/end argument
/end thread
6 Likes
Damn, I love you. 
1 Like
Well I think (thoughts and assertion here, not argument, just musings)
There should DEFINATELY be a suicide gank the hauler mission in NPE.
There should DEFINATELY be a ‘save the damsel’ mission in NPE that results in player being locked down by NPC’s who behave like PC pirates, who ransom and perhaps not honour, whether or not they ransom should be random, such that google-fu cannot tell the new player how to respond in all circumstances- this mission SHOULD ALWAYS RESULT IN THE LOSS OF POD- its reward should be greater than isk lost, and should also consist of an eve mail from the NPC/PC pirate explaining the basics of PVP and how to use D-scan etc.
EDIT: I do not suggest this to encourage all players to become gankers, but because getting a new player to learn what is required in a gank, will give them the tools to survive a gank and avoid situatiions like this:
It would also reduce the cost of reading OPs like fabulous Rod’s, often written by players who do not read the games documentation, dev blogs, and peruse the stickies in the ‘New Player Forum’, things not required in other games, but quite important in Eve.
2 Likes
This is all too easy. Only a few days ago I targetted someone in a Velator who was heading towards a yellow wreck, thinking perhaps he was about to go suspect and I’d enforce the law (can’t have thieves running rampant now can we). He targetted me back and a few moments passed (I imagine he was struggling with his Safety Settings) and then he opened fire. Concorded.
‘Why can’t I loot this yellow wreck?’ remains one of the most oft asked question in Rookie Help. In general, Rookies have no idea about Concord / Safety Settings / Suspect Status and so on. Their understanding of these mechanics is indeed woeful. Then again, such is EVE, knowledge is power, lack of it is dangerous. Not sure that should ever change.
1 Like
There seem to be many ‘gamers’ who, for the sake of their convenience, wish to be able to butterfly their way through game after game without learning much more than WSAD and L-Click. Who want every GUI to look roughly the same, with a Health bar, a My Gold bar, and with a chance to be Superman.
Naturally, they come a cropper when their gossamer wings bring them to EVE Online. So outlandish, so scary are the interface and mechanics, I’m sure some of them get no further than their very first activity. When the remainder further discover that, in order to see the ‘My Gold’ indicator tick upwards with anything resembling achievement, they need to…er…study, remember, and recall stuff, well; ‘I’m out’.
The ones that stay? They must be masochists, or something. Eventually, rather than move on to yet another game, they believe that, with a few adjustments, EVE would be right up their street, and so they spend time trying to persuade the game’s makers - either directly or via the CSM - to make their new world a comfy place, and suitable for butterflies…
2 Likes
As a virtual world with a real economy
eve must contain all types-
‘it takes many a mickle to make a muckle’ as grandfather Patrouette was wont to say.
I extracted all his skills for myself and stuck him in a nursing home for failed thieves and pirates, where threads like these bring him the only enjoyment left in his old tired life.
EDIT- but yes the EVE forums are the embodiment of the process you describe- I just wish the NPE could help them shed their gossamer wigs, or learn to find strength in their weakness, instead of jealousy and the eternal cry of 'unfair:
I want an NPE that would make @Fabulous_Rod the elite PVPer he so desperately wants to be, that is all.
2 Likes
OH MY GOD I PAY 5 BIL FOR THAT HAT IN GAME
2 Likes
